Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal Rep. Sylvia Garcia  CSPAN  May 19, 2022 2:20am-2:48am EDT

2:20 am
2:21 am
>> washington journal continues. host: congresswoman sylvia garcia now. she is a democrat from texas. i want to start with that failed effort by congressional democrats to codify roe v. wade into federal law. texas is one of those states with a trigger law. explain what happens in texas if the supreme court were to overturn roe v. wade. guest: people need to remember that rugby laid -- remember that roe v. wade still is the law of the land. women still have the freedom to choose. texas regrettably has led the way in this arena. we have already been living a
2:22 am
much closer to life without roe v. wade, because the abortion law that texas passed last year is so horrific that it almost criminalizes abortion and totally takes away the decision for a woman to make her own personal decision. the law also included a provision that if roe v. wade were overturned that within 30 days of the decision, another portion triggers -- it has nothing to do with guns -- but it is called a trigger law because this action triggers another provision, which essentially criminalizes abortion and especially for medical providers, that if anyone aids and embeds -- and abets in this procedure, they will be subject to felony
2:23 am
charges and potential jail time. that is what is at stake. with the supreme court doing what we think it is going to do, we will be criminalizing abortion and criminalizing medical care. this is something people need to realize that it is more than just roe v. wade, it is the criminalization of abortion. host: you mentioned texas is leading the way on these laws. what is it about texas this issue that texas is leading the way? guest: it is similar to the national problem. a recent gallup poll says that 80% of the public wants access to abortion and thinks roe v. wade should be protected. summarily, in texas, is about
2:24 am
65% to 70% in my own district. we did a survey. the votes were 72% for protecting access to abortion. they are not listening to the public. they are listening to the base, their own views, and the plan they have had for decades. the problem is that we need a change in government that will listen to the public and to judicial precedent. host: on that bill to codify roe v. wade that passed the house but was not able to overcome the filibuster in the senate, it was your colleague henry cuellar who was the only democrat against that bill in the house.
2:25 am
what are your thoughts on his stance on this issue? is this something that democrats should shun other democrats over? guest: i have known mr. cuellar for a long time. he is catholic like i am. we just have different views. i am a former judge. i believe in the rule of all and settled law and more importantly in women's decisions. this personally affects me, my nieces, my grandchildren. it is personal to a woman about a woman's personal freedom. freedom does not come to us wrapped up in pink or baby blue. freedom is for everybody. it has enough sex. women should have the same
2:26 am
freedom that men do. i do not see any instance where anyone is suggesting that we control men's bodies. are we going to start forcing them to have that sector mise because we -- to have vasectomie s because we want to do something about the potential of men raping or assaulting someone? we needed to make sure that this issue is about women's personal, private decisions. it is her right and the government should not interfere. if anyone should tell her what to do, it is the people she chooses to advise her, like her doctor, her family, a person of faith. for me, my priest.
2:27 am
greece position when that different from mine, but i respect it, because that is what pro-choice is about, respecting people's decisions. i am catholic, i am unabashedly pro-choice. host: sylvia garcia with us until the top of the hour. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8002,s --independents. president biden in buffalo yesterday calling white supremacy a poison and calling for an assault weapons ban. in this congress, do you see any appetite to take up the idea of an assault weapons ban? guest: i do not think it is a
2:28 am
question of our appetite. i think the public is demanding it. people are tired of hearing of the incidents. they are happening too often. what happened in buffalo was horrific, but so were other incidents. my heart breaks when i hear the audio of one of the relatives of one of the victims, saying, we are tired, angry. many people i have talked to, even in texas, are tired. i know how to shoot a rifle, a shotgun. i own a 410 in case i have an intruder, but it is only for that purpose. handgun in my view are not for
2:29 am
hunting or protection. they are for killing. we need to do something about making sure that bad guys do not their hands on handguns. when you can make sure that these weapons do not get in the hands of bad guys and sometimes bad women. -- we need to make sure that these weapons do not get into the hands of bad guys and sometimes bad women. i have been hunting, but you do not take a handgun to hunt. it is meant to shoot many people quickly. i support a ban because people want action. we stood up on the floor for those victims of buffalo. one of my colleagues said, but what are we going to do? it is time to do something. i am glad the president is
2:30 am
putting that on the table. we need to rally around it and the public needs to show this is something they demand. bob, tennessee, republican line. caller: the second amendment, trying to understand what it means. as far as babies go, i do not see how women could be so heartless and murder an innocent child. you act like life do not matter that you are worried about a gun killing somebody. it is not the gun, it is the video behind it, just like you women. host: that is bob tennessee. congresswoman? guest: to me, what is important is a woman's freedom.
2:31 am
we have to protect that. it has been settled law for 50 years. we have to keep in mind that roe v. wade is restrictive. people cannot get an abortion on demand as you are trying to suggest good is just in the first trimester. any abortion in the later months , when there is more of a permission of the navy, those mostly do not happen. we need to look at the rights of the mother and exceptions for rape and incensed -- incensed. -- incest. this is coupled law. the woman needs to make that private decision after consulting with her doctor or man or woman of the cloth. host: ape, virginia.
2:32 am
caller: --host: abe, virginia. caller: when people send people to congress, we are sending you there to represent us, not to preach to us, not to tell us what to do good in this specific instance of abortion -- guest: take your time. caller: in this specific content congress, you are not to tell us what is and is not a woman's right, if you take that as a right, the voice of the fathers are not being considered. you mentioned the fathers. number two, talking about gun
2:33 am
rights, that is in the constitution. it is not for you as a representative to decide how to fine-tune the constitution -- the rights given by the constitution to tell us moralistic late what we are supposed to have and not have. guest: on the first point, you may have missed what i said, consulting with her family. her family would include the husband or partner or whoever she was involved with. but the bottom line is the ultimate choice has two be placed on the freedom to choose, on the woman. it is her body, her personal, private decision.
2:34 am
i have seen some women and talked to some who are devastated in making the decision. it is not a quick decision. they have to search their hearts, soul, conscience. we have to respect that. i did say family and i think it is important that the woman consult with who -- with her support, whoever it is. this is a hard decision. there is a right to bear's in the constitution, but also other rights -- to bear arms in the constitution but also other rights. reset parameters. free speech is in the constitution, but we do not let someone walk into a theater and
2:35 am
say something that would incite violence. there are parameters around all of our rights in the constitution. assault weapons is probably not what the founding fathers were thinking about. they were talking about the militia and how to prepare themselves in case we had the english or someone coming to invade us that we would have a right to defend ourselves, like i have a shotgun in my house to defend my property. it is something we need to keep in mind that we have rights embedded in the constitution, but we have always set parameters. if someone challenges that, it would go to the supreme court. host: a question from twitter, great about the 410, but what
2:36 am
about your power grid in texas? rates are sky high and it is not even summer yet. any solutions? guest: it will require changing government. our governor has failed us in this regard. he miserably failed us last year. we are not even in the full heat of the summer and last weekend, we got messages to start raising our thermostats to 78 to conserve energy. the governor appoints people for the board that manages the grid. he has a light of say in what goes on there -- has a lot of say in what goes on there.
2:37 am
it is time for us to consider joining the national grid, time of rs is to have people in those offices that are about serving the consumers, because we are not getting in a lot of detail. i used to be a state senator. we looked at these issues. there was a study made with recommendations to weatherize our grid, to make updates. they have failed to do that because they do not want the increased costs to the people that own the generators and help us produce electricity. it is mixed priorities. they should be about making sure they are working for the consumers and not the contractors. host: arlington, virginia, line for democrats. this is jason. caller: full disclosure, i do
2:38 am
not like much about texas, but i love you. you have got the best music in the country, but somehow it does not get out into the culture as far as civil rights discourse, but that is beside the point. i am from buffalo originally, six blocks walking from that supermarket. i appreciate anything you, your colleagues, anything you can do to not just reach across the aisle, but put a good croak around people's next and get them to realize that this country is way too good to be this too stupid. six bullets are enough to
2:39 am
protect your home. you do not need 90. peace out and god bless you, congresswoman. guest: i know that you hurt a lot. i am so sorry about what happened. we want to make sure it does not happen again. as i said earlier, people are tired, want to see action. it is important to keep in mind that this is all about hate. it was planned, based on race. it was a young man who had very, very different views. unfortunately, hate crimes are on an increase. white supremacy is on an
2:40 am
increase. i sit on the judiciary committee and recall when the fbi director came in and testified. we know it when we see it. we need to do something to find a way to bring people together and address some of these issues, not just guns but this epidemic of hate. we need -- we have and to do. host: you mentioned your work on the judiciary committee. last week, you joined arms -- armed services as well. guest: i have been working on a bill with jackie speier. it is the nsa again act -- the vanessa gilland -- guillen act.
2:41 am
she was a young soldier murdered at fort hood by another soldier. there were allegations that were looked at. they were true, she was sexually harassed. it was a toxic environment at fort hood. we made changes in that act last year to make sure that complaints and allegations of sexual assault are out of the chain of command to ensure that the soldier making the complaints can do that without fear of retribution or disciplinary action. we made of changes. during that process, i set in on
2:42 am
many armed services committee meetings, went to fort hood several times. as even jackie speier said, almost getting better attendance and some of the committee members. some of the requests -- there was a vacancy, they asked if i wanted to serve. i said yes. it is an honor to serve on a committee that will be about making sure that all our soldiers in all of our armed forces in our installations across the globe that they receive the protection and resources, the salary that they deserve. it is about making sure i can follow on the work i was doing on the act but also to make sure
2:43 am
i was protecting the people who protect us,. our soldiers host: this is a way, colorado, independent. caller: i am a registered libertarian. one issue big on my mind is immigration, not just in terms of people coming in but the backlog. you mentioned your role in the armed services committee. there is a book called blowback. one of the root causes of these uneven migration patterns has to do with military intervention throughout the decades, around the world, as well as covert operations by the cia and other government actors.
2:44 am
do you think we need to do to reassess our interventionist role in the world as a way to tackle immigration? guest: to be honest, i have never heard that. in terms of what causes migration. people have been looking at migration patterns for many years. it is not a new problem. it does not matter who is in the white house, there will always be issues they did to immigration, but i have never heard anything that it could be related to any intervention around the world. but i have only been on the committee one week. let me get my feet on the ground and i will look at that. i certainly am open to any
2:45 am
suggestions that would help on the immigration issue. we may have to revisit this question. host: mary, louisiana, line for democrats. caller: i am hauling [indiscernible] host: mary, turn your television down. caller: calling -- i am calling about women getting abortions, we have the right. it is our body. to them, i want to say, who do they think they are when we have to cite for our rights -- we have to fight for our right? we are going to take something from the men. host: congresswoman? guest: it is a hard decision to
2:46 am
make, whether or not to be a parent. it is hard particularly in today's world. when a woman becomes pregnant, it is important that we recognize that she is carrying. it is her personal, private decision. we need to respect that. i am catholic. i am pro-choice. if i had gotten pregnant, i probably would not have had an abortion, but that is what i would decide. those are decisions that we make. it is important that we protect the freedom to control your own body and make your own personal medical care decisions with no
2:47 am
interference by the government. ask yourselves this, if they can tell women what they can do with their bodies, what is next? that is the key question today and maybe a topic for when i return to talk to y'all on this program. host:>> washington journal cont. host: the professor of science at harvard and the galileo initiative joins us. he is the author of the first signs of intelligent life beyond earth. good morning. before we get to the historic hearing yesterday on ufos or uap's as they are known now, can you start with your view on extraterrestrial life? do you believe that there is alien life out there? guest: it would be arrogant


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on